From: mur@awite.de   
      
   >   
   >>>>Why not simple multiplying the (resulting) membership value(s) by the   
   >>>>wight?   
   >>>   
   >>>Because it is infeasible. Values of the membership function are not   
   >>>multiplicative in the classic fuzzy set theory.   
   >>   
      
   It is suggested in some fuzzy books. But maybe it is more logical not to   
   use a WITH operator but use an additional condition like:   
      
   if .... AND weight = full then ...   
      
   If one sets the (one) set the way, that a weight of 0.5 would be a truth   
     value of 0.5 (e.g. a triangle beginning at 0 with a truth value of 0   
   and have a maximum of 1 at 1), couldn't this be used instead of WIDTH?   
      
      
   >   
   > PROD-operator is used empirically without any justification. It isn't   
   > fuzzy. It might be called probabilistic under some, extremely rare,   
   > circumstances. Though as normally used, it is plain shamanic.   
      
   OK, you can find it in many books about fuzzy logic. But for me, this   
   operator never seemed to be logic used as "AND". As you explain: A and A   
   is not A?   
      
   However, I used it for WITH. If you want to weight a rule by e.g. 0.5:   
   Multiplication by 0.5 could be regarded as propability. Or not?   
      
      
   Greetings   
      
   Ernst   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)